Motivation and Emotion

, Volume 37, Issue 3, pp 586–599

The emergence of emotions and religious sentiments during the September 11 disaster

Original Paper


Analyzing emotional states under duress or during heightened, life-and-death situations is extremely difficult, especially given the inability of laboratory experiments to replicate the environment and given the inherent biases of post event surveys. This is where natural experiments, such as the pager communications from September 11th can provide the kind of natural experiment emotion researchers have been seeking. We demonstrate that positive and pro-social communications are the first to emerge followed by the slower and lower negative communications. Religious sentiment is the last to emerge, as individual attempt to make sense of event. Additionally we provide a methodological discussion about the preparation and analysis of such natural experiments (the pager message content) and show the importance of using multiple methods to extract the broadest possible understanding.


Content analysis Positive emotion Negative emotion Religion Disaster communications 9/11 


  1. Andreoni, J., & Miller, J. H. (2002). Giving according to garp: An experimental test of the consistency of preferences for altruism. Econometrica, 70, 737–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aspinwall, L. G. (1998). Rethinking the role of positive affect in self-regulation. Motivation and Emotion, 22(1), 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aspinwall, L. G. (2004). Dealing with adversity: Self-regulation, coping, adaptation, and health. Applied Social Psychology, 1, 3–27.Google Scholar
  4. Back, M. D., Küfner, A. C., & Egloff, B. (2010). The emotional timeline of September 11, 2001. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1417–1419.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Back, M. D., Küfner, A. C. P., & Egloff, B. (2011). Automatic or the people?. Psychological Science, 22(6), 837–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Batson, D., Pate, S., Lawless, H., Sparkman, P., Lambers, S., & Worman, B. (1979). Helping under conditions of common threat: Increased we-feeling or ensuring reciprocity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 42, 410–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Becker, G. S. (1974). A theory of social interaction. Journal of the Political Economy, 41(1), 54–73.Google Scholar
  8. Bolton, G. E., & Ockenfels, A. (2000). Erc: Theory of equity, reciprocity, and competition. American Economic Review, 90, 166–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Camerer, C. F. (2004). Prospect theory in the wild: Evidence from the field. In C. F. Camerer, G. Loewenstein, & M. Rabin (Eds.), Advances in behavioral economics (pp. 148–161). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cohn, M. A., Mehl, M. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2004). Linguistic markers of psychological change surrounding September 11, 2001. Psychological Science, 15(10), 687–693.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Drago, R., & Garvey, G. T. (1998). Incentives for helping on the job: Theory and evidence. Journal of Labor Economics, 16, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dufwenberg, M., & Kirchsteiger, G. (2004). A theory of sequential reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 47, 268–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Elster, J. (2007). Explaining social behaviour. More nuts and bolts for the social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Emmons, R. A. (2005). Striving for the sacred: Personal goals, life meaning, and religion. Journal of Social Issues, 61(4), 731–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Emmons, R. A., & Paloutzian, R. F. (2003). The psychology of religion. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 377–402.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 817–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Folkman, S., & Moskowitz, J. T. (2000). Positive affect and the other side of coping. American Psychologist, 55(6), 647.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Foltz, P. W., Kintsch, W., & Landauer, T. K. (1998). The measurement of textual coherence with latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25(2&3), 285–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fredrickson, B. L., Tugade, M. M., Waugh, C. E., & Larkin, G. R. (2003). What good are positive emotions in crisis? A prospective study of resilience and emotions following the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11th, 2001. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(2), 365.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Freud, S. (1901). Psychopathology of everyday life. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  21. Frey, B. S. (1997). Not just for the money: An economic theory of personal motivation. London: Cheltenham.Google Scholar
  22. Frey, B. S., Savage, D. A., & Torgler, B. (2010). Interaction of natural survival instincts and internalized social norms exploring the Titanic and Lusitania disasters. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(11), 4862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hart, R. (2001). Redeveloping diction: Theoretical considerations. In M. West (Ed.), Theory, method and practice in computer content analysis. New York: Alblex.Google Scholar
  24. Heide, E. A. d. (2004). Common misconceptions about disasters: Panic, the disaster syndrome, and looting. In M. O’Leary (Ed.), The first 72 hours: A community approach to disaster preparedness (pp. 340–380). Lincoln: iUniverse Publishing.Google Scholar
  25. Hogg, M. A., Adelman, J. R., & Blagg, R. D. (2010). Religion in the face of uncertainty: An uncertainty-identity theory account of religiousness. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(1), 72–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hood, R. W., Hill, P. C., & Spilka, B. (2009). The psychology of religion. An empirical approach. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  27. Hård Segerstad, Y. (2005). Language in sms a socio-linguistic view. In R. Harper et al. (Eds.), The inside text, volume 4 of the Kluwer international series on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 33–51). Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Kean, T. H., & Hamilton, L. (2004). 9/11 commission report: Final report of the national commission on terrorist attacks upon the United States. New York:WW Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  29. Kelley, H. (1971). Attribution in social interaction. In E. Jones, D. Kanouse, H. Kelley, R. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution perceiving the causes of behavior. Morristown: General Learning Press.Google Scholar
  30. Lacan, J. (1968). The language of the self: The function of language in psychoanalysis. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
  31. Ling, R. (2003). The socio-linguistics of SMS: An analysis of SMS use by a random sample of Norwegians. Mobile Communication and the Renegotiation of the Social Sphere, 31(4), 335–349.Google Scholar
  32. Martos, T., Kézdy, A., & Horváth-Szabó, K. (2011). Religious motivations for everyday goals: Their religious context and potential consequences. Motivation and Emotion, 35(1), 75–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mawson, A. R. (2007). Mass panic and social attachment: The dynamics of human behavior. Ashgate: Aldershot.Google Scholar
  34. Pargament, K. I., Magyar-Russell, G. M., & Murray-Swank, N. A. (2005). The sacred and the search for significance: Religion as a unique process. Journal of Social Issues, 61(4), 665–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Park, C. L. (2005). Religion as a meaning-making framework in coping with life stress. Journal of Social Issues, 61(4), 707–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pennebaker, J. W., Mehl, M. R., & Niederhoffer, K. G. (2003). Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 547–577.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Popping, R. (2000). Computer-assisted text analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  38. Pury, C. L. S. (2011). Automation can lead to confounds in text analysis: Back, Küfner, and Egloff (2010) and the not-so-angry Americans. Psychological Science, 22(6), 835–836.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rabin, M. (1993). Incorperating fairness into game theory and economics. The Americian Economic Review, 83(5), 1281–1302.Google Scholar
  40. Ripley, A. (2008). The unthinkable: Who survives when disaster strikes—and why?. London: Random House.Google Scholar
  41. Savage, D. A., & Torgler, B. (2010). Fairness and allocations systems. Economic Analysis and Policy, 40(2), 229–248.Google Scholar
  42. Silberman, I. (2005). Religion as a meaning system: Implications for the new millennium. Journal of Social Issues, 61(4), 641–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sobel, J. (2005). Interdependent preferences and reciprocity. Journal of Economic Literature, 42, 392–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Spilka, B., Shaver, P., & Kirkpatrick, L. A. (1985). A general attribution theory for the psychology of religion. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 24(1), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. The Federal Building & Fire Saftey Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster. (2008). Final report on the collapse of world trade center building 7 (Tech. Rep.). National institute of Standards and Technology: US Department of Commerce.Google Scholar
  46. Thurlow, C. (2003). Generation txt? Exposing the sociolinguistics of young peopleŠs text messaging (Vol. 1) (No. 1). Sheffield Hallam University, 20th June 2012.Google Scholar
  47. Tix, A. P., & Frazier, P. A. (2005). Mediation and moderation of the relationship between intrinsic religiousness and mental health. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(3), 295–306.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Torgler, B. (2007). Tax compliance and tax morale: A theoretical and empirical analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  49. Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis (Vol. 7). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Economics and Finance, Queensland Behavioural Economics (QuBE)Queensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA)BaselSwitzerland
  3. 3.EBS Universität für Wirtschaft und Recht, EBS Business School, ISBSOestrich-WinkelGermany

Personalised recommendations